A question of consistency

On October 1, 1986, Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued a “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.” Therein he advised:

All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely misinterpreted. Special attention should be given to the practice of scheduling religious services and to the use of Church buildings by these groups, including the facilities of Catholic schools and colleges. To some, such permission to use Church property may seem only just and charitable; but in reality it is contradictory to the purpose for which these institutions were founded, it is misleading and often scandalous. (17)

In light of this statement, I wonder what the Holy Father thinks of the decision of Cardinal Levada (his successor as prefect of the CDF) to override the order of Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor (Archbishop of Westminster) that homosexual activists in London desist from celebrating irregular Masses at an Anglican church in Soho or from using the title 'Roman Catholic' and, instead, to move the Masses to a Catholic church (Our Lady of the Assumption on Warwick Street) in an effort to regularize them. The activist group in question had called itself "Roman Catholic Church Caucus of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement" (RCC for short), but, instead of discontinuing its Masses, simply formed a sub-committee calling itself the "Soho Masses Pastoral Council" (SMPC), under the auspices of which it continued its dissident Masses. Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, OP, former head of the Dominican Order, has reportedly celebrated Mass for the openly dissident homosexual group (see "Fr. Timothy Radcliffe OP at St Anne's Church, Soho," Independent Catholic News, May 3, 2004; and "Homilies" (scroll down to "Soho Mass Homily for Ascension Day - Sunday May 20th 2007," by Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, OP).

For more on this, see "Masses for Gay activists, again" (Catholic Action, UK, March 1, 2007); "Westminster's 'Masses for Gays' used to promote dissent" (Catholic Action, UK, March 26, 2007); "Church of the (Soho) Masses" (Whispers in the Loggia, February 15, 2007); "The Soho Masses Pastoral Council," "Civil Partnerships," "The Soho Masses" (all on the SMPC website); and "Outreach and ministry to homosexual persons" (The Diocese of Westminster, February 2, 2007).

Catholic Action, UK, concludes:

There is here a deliberate ambigity as to whether, and in what sense, these Masses are intended for homosexuals.

It should be noted that the new arrangements represent a victory for faithful Catholics who have been voicing their concerns about the previous arrangements for many years. Specifically, the Archdiocese seems to be seeking to take control of the Masses, to prevent their being hijacked by groups explicitly or implicitly opposed to Church teaching. The celebrants, for example, are apparantly going to be selected by the Archdiocese, and not invited by a self-selected committee of gay activists, as happened in the past. The implication seems to be that Martin Prendegast and his group of dissidents will have no role to play at all.

Legitimage concerns remain, however, as to how the arrangements will work in practice. Are these Masses, in practice, intended to provide a spiritual home for the 'Soho Masses Pastoral Council', whose website is filled with references to dissenting priests and theologians and their views? Will people giving public scandal by their lifestyles be given communion? And what, in light of the first of the two paragraphs quoted above, is the point of drawing Catholics of a particular sexual orientation away from their parishes, for worship as a group? Please take up these concerns with the Cardinal Archbishop of Wesmister (mailto:enquiries@rcdow.org.uk). , and with Cardinal Levada (cdf@cfaith.va).

The de facto ambiguities of policy implementation, at this point, contrast shartply with the clarity of CDF statements of the former Cardinal Ratzinger.